Evidence of meeting #9 for Subcommittee on Food Safety in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was inspectors.
A recording is available from Parliament.
6:15 p.m.
Inspector, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Actually, CVS is a micro-dissection of a directed program into fine bits. When it is properly implemented, you will catch the error.
6:15 p.m.
Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC
Both of you have been in the system long enough to see HACCP come in. You see the positives from that. Do you want to talk a little bit about those--because we have talked some about HACCP--and then maybe you could talk about what CVS builds on top of that.
We had a witnesses earlier who doesn't seem to appreciate CVS the way some other people do. So I'd just like your input on how HACCP has changed the plants and your whole process, and then on how CVS has improved that as well.
6:15 p.m.
Food Processing Supervisor, Complex 3 - Toronto, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Industry has evolved, and so has the agency. We have all different processing techniques. We have HACCP. HACCP is an industry-run program. Each plant has a plant-specific HACCP plan. CVS was created through a personal plant profile on the plant, which was created by the inspector. We have a CVS compliance team in our area office who would then, out of all the different aspects and processes, develop a specific CVS task random tracking table for the inspector to follow in order to do the tasks that were related to that particular plant's HACCP plan. I think we all like the CVS program, and with the proper amount of time that can be devoted to CVS, it's a good system.
6:15 p.m.
Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC
How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair? A couple of minutes?
6:15 p.m.
Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC
I want to talk a little bit, then, about last year. Basically we've heard from witnesses that if those positive environmental test results had been communicated to CFIA prior to July, alarm bells might have gone off earlier and the outbreak might have been prevented. Now, that environmental testing was eliminated in 2005 under a Liberal government. I guess we believe it was a mistake for them to have done that. We brought that back in April 1. Do you agree that if those assessments had been gathered together, if they'd known about the environmental testing results ahead of time, we could have prevented that outbreak?
6:15 p.m.
Food Processing Supervisor, Complex 3 - Toronto, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Could we have or would we have?
6:15 p.m.
Food Processing Supervisor, Complex 3 - Toronto, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
We could have, possibly. I can't say we would have. If you look at the analogy that you have one individual or two looking for a needle in the haystack, the chances of finding the needle with two people are greater than one.
6:15 p.m.
Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC
That's what we've heard from basically everybody, that the risk cannot be eliminated completely but that we certainly can control it. I think those new regulations have done that.
6:15 p.m.
Food Processing Supervisor, Complex 3 - Toronto, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Yes.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Welcome to the panel members.
I was reading two reports. One was from the CanWest News Service, and the other one was from a Globe and Mail article of August 27, 2008, which said that the inspectors responsible for the Maple Leaf plant in Toronto had to supervise six or seven other facilities. Can you indicate the level of work activity before this listeria tragedy happened and now? Is it the same, or how would you see it?
6:15 p.m.
Food Processing Supervisor, Complex 3 - Toronto, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
In general or for that individual?
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
6:15 p.m.
Food Processing Supervisor, Complex 3 - Toronto, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
On the work level before for that individual, Mr. Zalac, who was the responsible inspector, the demands on his time were great. He was assigned to Maple Leaf Foods, which is a large processing plant. He was assigned to two other processing plants. At that particular time he was assigned to four cold storages, for a total of seven facilities. Today the agency has made modifications, and not only to the geographical distribution of plants within Toronto. Currently Mr. Zalac is looking after just one facility, Maple Leaf Foods, and the workload on the area that I happen to supervise has been decreased.
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
How about in general for other inspectors? Is it still the same, or has it improved a bit?
6:15 p.m.
Food Processing Supervisor, Complex 3 - Toronto, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
In the area that I supervise, it has improved a bit, yes.
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
I have another question for you fellows.
We had three different organizations making statements. The vice-president of operations with CFIA, Cameron, made a statement that the compliance verification system is a good system, and it's working. Inspectors are spending 50% of their time on the floor and 50% on the paperwork.
When it comes to Honourable Minister Ritz, he stated that inspectors spend 50% of their time on the floor and 50% on the paperwork.
Then we go to the president of the Agriculture Union, Mr. Kingston, who was here earlier. He stated that almost 40 inspectors, every single one called and stated that 25% of the time is spent on the work floor and 75% of the time is spent on the paperwork.
Do you agree with the CFIA and the minister, or do you agree with the president of the Agriculture Union?
6:20 p.m.
Food Processing Supervisor, Complex 3 - Toronto, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
I can't verify either number per se, but I know that inspectors out in the field do not spend 50% of their time on the floor.
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
Would you call it less than 40%, less than 30%? I mean, when you say it's not 50%, you might have some idea of whether it's 35% or 25% or 15% on the floor.
I'm looking for a general ballpark figure.
6:20 p.m.
Food Processing Supervisor, Complex 3 - Toronto, Canadian Food Inspection Agency
I can't really say. Each plant is unique in their operation. As I discussed a little bit earlier, each plant has a specific plant profile for the tasks that have to be done. At some plants, the inspector may spend more time on the floor than at other plants.
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
But surely you agree, then, that the statements made by CFIA and the minister are not true, that 50% of the time is not spent by inspectors on the floor.
I'm going back to the question that I asked earlier of Mr. Kingston. I would like to see what your opinion is.
If we turn to the Toronto Public Health document, we can see a critique of the compliance verification system:
...concerns have been expressed by health authorities and others about the effectiveness of the federal Compliance Verification System and its self-monitoring features....These concerns suggest that there is too much reliance on information supplied by plant operators....it is reasonable to expect that direct inspection by trained staff of a public agency may provide greater assurance that standards are indeed being met in all food industry premises.
How do you see this from your angle?
